Dear friends,
The below editorial "The Egypt Revolution & The Jewish Revolution it Produced" by MJ Rosenberg, Feb. 4, should be of interest to all who are concerned about the Middle East, past, present and future. Rosenberg's analysis is thought provoking and raises very important questions.
I am receiving various reports, articles and editorials about Israel and the issues and concerns surrounding its role as regards the revolutions in Egypt, Libya and elsewhere in the Middle East. In the next paragraphs, I strive to elaborate on Rosenberg's analysis, outlining the dilemma behind the many questions surrounding Israel's outdated policies and the extreme passion behind all discussions about the Middle East's ever-present problems and never-ending search for solutions.
Before we discuss the Israeli dilemma, let us first attempt to get our minds around what happened in and to Egypt over the last 30 years or so.
The Egyptian 25 January revolution was not about governments, parliaments, constitutions or presidential advisory councils, it was not about who should or should not govern . No, it was all about poverty, injustice, about the desperately deprived people; about the thousands of unemployed college graduates; about the millions of Egyptians all over the world seeking a decent and dignified life, one their country could not afford them (and representing a major brain drain); about the 30-40 year old widow or divorcee forced to live with her parents, causing misery all around, because it is so hard to get married first time let alone a second time and women have few options for financial independence; about people living among the dead in cemeteries, who cannot find bare minimum housing to shelter them; about people with sewage seeping through their floor of their homes; and about people who can afford eating only rotten bread, destroying their health in the process...That and more is what the 25 January revolution was all about.
Now let's consider the accomplishments of Mubarak's regime. Mubarak's gifts to the Egyptian people include:
- An average family income of less than 60 dollars a month.
- 43% of the population with liver disease.
- 32% with hepatitis C (HCV).
- 13% with cancer.
- 38% with renal failure.
- 82% of government and government-related transactions are corrupt.
- 23% looting of Egypt's GDP.
- 28% unemployment.
- 42% illiteracy.
- The highest rate of degeneration of ethics and intellect in the history of Egypt, ancient and modern.
- An abnormal percentage of political ignorance, due mainly to the negative stigma attached to and punishment doled out to those who dare to speak politics.
Thomas Friedman wrote in the New York Times, Feb. 22 that the Arab world has been insulated from history for the last 50 years, that it has been ruled for decades by the same kings and dictators. He indicates that the combination of rising food prices, huge bulges of unemployed youth and social networks enabled Egypt's youths to organize against Mubarak and break down all the barriers of fear that kept his kleptocracy in power. Friedman also refers to the United Nations’ Arab Human Development Report 2002, which stated that the Arab world is suffering from three huge deficits — a deficit of education, a deficit of freedom and a deficit of women’s empowerment.
Well, all of the above about Egypt's state of affairs over the last 30 years could be with certainty said about Libya, only Qaddafi's reign is 42 years and still counting!
Now, about Israel... David Remnick wrote in The New Yorker, Feb. 28, "In the early days of the uprising in Egypt, the Web site of the journal Foreign Policy published a list of the ten world leaders who are freaking out the most." Coming in first, ahead of all the nerve-racked autocrats who had reason to fear that the democratic fervor would spread their way from Tahrir Square, was the popularly elected Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Rattled by the demonstrations in Tahrir Square, Netanyahu sent a cable to Israel's embassies abroad, telling diplomats to advertise the constancy of Hosni Mubarak and caution against the alternatives. Shimon Peres, the Israeli President, gave a speech warning against a future Egypt with the Muslim Brotherhood in power. On Feb. 23, in an interview with Wolf Blitzer of CNN, Ehud Barak, Israel's Defense Minister, said with earnest conviction that Mubarak is a good man, that he did a lot for Egypt and he should be respected. And nearly all the Israel's main media outlets described the news from Egypt in terms fraught with alarm.
More recently, as regards the 17 February Libyan revolution, reports from inside Israel indicate that Israeli leaders, Netanyahu, Barak and Avigdor Lieberman, Israel's virulently anti-Arab Foreign Minister, view the Libyan revolution from the perspective of strategic security, and believe that the fall of the Qaddafi regime would/will open the door to an "Islamic regime" in Libya.
Now, with Egypt losing 30 years of development time in all facets of its life, Libya losing 42 years and counting, and the fact that these are Muslim countries, such positions taken, comments made by Israeli leaders are wrong, insulting and show utter disregard to the well-being of people of Egypt and Libya. These comments are governed and guided by ill-advised, short-sighted, worn-out and risk-laden policies. Proven or not proven, it is comments like these that demonstrate to people in the Middle East region that Israel is not interested in democracy, development and the inevitable state of stabilization that ensues, Israel is not a good neighbor, maybe Israel is behind the signs of counter-revolution in both of these countries.
Since 1979, Israel has based its national security strategy on a peace treaty with Egypt, a treaty that drastically reduced the prospect of regional war in the Middle East. More importantly, that treaty allowed Israel to drop the percent of its national budget for defense from 23% to 8%, accounting in part for Israel's economic boom of the last couple of decades. It is not debatable that Israel's current prosperity depends in part on the peace treaty, Israel badly needs peace with Egypt. Anwar Sadat, President of Egypt, 1970-1981, was the key driver behind that peace treaty, a treaty he negotiated with the US and Israel with the vast majority of his people against it, they still are, but he did it because he believed it was the right thing to do for the Egyptian people and the whole of the Middle East. Sadat paid for his vision and courage with his life, but he was right, look how Israel has benefited and if Sadat had lived what prevents us from envisioning him ushering democracy in Egypt, thus allowing it to reap the same economic benefits and prosperity, we will never know!
It is time, it is time for an Israeli leader of Sadat's quality to emerge and return the favor, I am not holding my breath with the current crop of small men at the helm of Israel.
Until this happens, let us consider Israel's position in the Middle East today, to say it is a dilemma is an understatement of magnificent proportions. The Israeli government has gone out of its way to support a brutal Mubarak who was nice to Israel but subjected his people to decades of poverty, injustice and torture. This Israeli government is comfortable sending a message that a democracy in Egypt may usher in the Muslim Brothers who will then proceed to control Egypt, which will then be hostile to Israel. Therefore, since Egypt cannot guarantee that its democracy will produce a secular, modern and moderate country, then democracy is not for Egypt. You do not need to be an Egyptian, a Libyan or any other Arab citizen for that matter to see the irony of such a position by Israel. Many American Jews are debating this irony, noting that Israel, which has long promoted itself as the only democracy in its neighborhood, should not be voicing concerns about the birth of a democracy next door. Other Jewish organizations and groups including Birthright Unplugged, Break the Silence, Jewish Voice for Peace, J Street, and Jewish Funds for Justice, all believe strongly in justice and humanitarianism, all believe that the government of Israel is losing its soul, a real sad prospect considering the long history of Jews being persecuted, struggling against oppression for millennia. All of these Jewish organizations question, object to, and demonstrate against the occupation of the West Bank, the continuous building of settlements, the building of the wall and the lack of definitive progress toward the two state solution, the ONLY viable solution. All these Jewish organizations consider all of that injustice toward the Palestinian people, an injustice that could backfire on Israel.
Israel's injustice toward the Palestinian people and its indefensible and irresponsible position as regards setting conditions for democracy in Egypt, Libya and other Arab countries has and will continue to make it impossible for Israel to live as a good neighbor in the Middle East. In Egypt, I was sadly amused to find out over the last few weeks that people who were pro-Mubarak were convinced that Israel, and the US of course, were behind his downfall to replace him with a weaker ally, and people behind the successful revolution are convinced that Israel and the US were trying hard to keep him in power. Other people in Egypt, who have never been to Iran and who would not last a week living under the stifling Iranian regime, wish for Iran to acquire nuclear capability to provide balance against Israel. In short, Israel may have the peace treaties with Egypt and Jordan, the niceties from the Arab dictators, but it also has secured, until such time as it drastically changes its strategy and policies, the wrath of the overwhelming majority of the people of the Middle East.
Now, before I discuss the two available options for Israel going forward, I would like to cover the topic of the Muslim Brothers. The Muslim Brotherhood is no different from the several influential right-wing rabbis in Israel who spout anti-Arab venom and have considerable power in the Knesset. Even if the Brotherhood's goals are abhorrent from Israel's point of view, it is the duty and responsibility of Egyptian democracy supporters to deal with them, Israel should deal with its own religious fundamentalists and their dangerous views. As democracy takes hold in Egypt, it would obviously and naturally be up to the Egyptian people how much power and control the Muslim Brotherhood has, the Egyptian people would have to choose between a secular, modern and moderate society and the Brotherhood way of life; it is their choice and theirs alone. In fact, not waiting for democracy or free and fair elections, the Military Supreme Council, the same military that served Mubarak, already is answering within the new draft constitution some of the Brotherhood's demands. The Military Supreme Council is saying that it will not stand in the Brotherhood's way and will allow the formation of a party, a daily paper and a weekly magazine and whatever percentage they can get elected into the parliament. This is the military Israel wants to stay in power, does that make sense? The objective of the military here could be to retain control of the government. Be that as it may, this goes to point out the ludicrousness of the Israeli's initial and continued response to the revolution, instead of getting behind, showing concern for the Egyptian people's welfare, supporting them in seeking a better future, and demonstrating trust in their judgement, thus gaining maybe a tiny measure of goodwill, the Israeli leaders in their infinite wisdom chose panic and the fear of the unknown, not vision, not hope. If the military retains power and continues to deprive the Egyptian people of the self-rule it deserves, it won't be for long. The revolution is irreversible. Israel will have missed an opportunity to alter the way it is perceived by Egypt and by the Arab world in general.
Israel must stop worrying about the nature of regimes in the Arab world, about what kind of democracies are acceptable in the Arab states, about what kind of Islam is good for it, all of which should never have been its business, but tragically it has been largely in the name of Israel's security and survival. In light of what is now transpiring throughout the region, it is Israel's responsibility to back off and focus on what it can do for the betterment of the region, which logically should be good for Israel since it is part and parcel of the region.
Israel is a strong nation, a democratic nation, a developed nation with a tremendous economy and a thriving populace. Israel has the full support of the United States, including its veto at the UN Security Council, and it is the only nation in the region with a nuclear arsenal. Therefore, instead of fear guiding its policies and modus operandi in the region, how about looking at what Israel can do differently, with bold, courageous and even earth-shaking initiatives, like the one Sadat took back in 1977. Israel must consider ways around waiting for its neighbors to declare their recognition of Israel and its right for existence.
- How about a settlement with the Palestinians on less-than-optimal terms from Israel's point of view. A settlement that will not only give the Palestinians that long-sought, long-suffering-for state, but would also send their way an economic-assistance package of magnificent proportions. A sovereign and prosperous state of Palestine would go a long, long way toward ushering in the Middle East region peace, stability and prosperity, yes prosperity for the region and not only for Israel.
- How about embarrassing its neighbors into peace and economic cooperation, having Netanyahu make visits similar to Sadat's to one or many of these neighbor states, discussing, enticing and convincing the sincerity of Israel's initiative toward the Palestinians, and its desire to be a fully participating member of the region, willing to share its wealth of resources, including its impressive human capital with its neighbors even if it means the slowdown of its own economic thrust forward. That will show Israel's strong desire for acceptance, for partnership and for development for all nations in the region.
- How about publicly and vociferously indicating its passionate support for freedom, democracy, the decent life and the commonality of the people of the region.
Above was the first alternative for Israel, a highly desirable one, one that in my opinion should be the only alternative. Again, Israel now more than ever needs to be proactive, take the initiative and produce a Sadat-like figure who would be willing and capable of taking the plunge into history, taking the whole region with him/her into a new promised land. Israel's security and survival must not be contingent on keeping the region in the hands of ruthless dictators and despots, instead it must be based on a free, fair and prosperous region.
The second alternative is to stay the current course, and let Israel take its chances. However, this is a course littered with confrontation, pronounced animosity and declared ominous intentions. I am convinced this would be a problem that carries risks of unthinkable proportions. Arab dictators ultimately are not good for Israel, because when they fall, and they will fall sooner or later, the fact that they have been propped up for the sake of Israel's interests turn countries like Egypt, once its valiant people free themselves from the despotic autocratic regime, into enemies of the state of Israel, a self-fulfilling prophecy. Israel would stand a solid chance of being in a perpetual state of isolation among its neighbors, of being suspect in its Middle East intentions in the eyes of the world, of living in fear and insecurity, constant instability - major miscalculations. Main reason would be, not only the current state of confrontation Israel has with many of its neighbors but that a free and democratic Egypt, and not the Muslim Brothers Egypt, would always remember and will not forgive that Israel did not support its January 25 people's revolution, failing to couple its own interests with the Egyptian people's interests, this new Egypt would not be a friend of Israel. Couple that with the lack of implementation of the two state solution, Egypt may no longer stay neutral. That is an alternative that does not speak to me of safety and security for Israel.
As George Friedman wrote in the Stratfor on February 8, "In due course, ideological shifts and recalculations of Israeli intentions will cause a change in Egyptian policy. This will take several decades to turn into effective military force, and the first conflicts may well end in Israeli victory. But, as I have said before, it must always be remembered that no matter how many times Israel wins, it need only lose once to be annihilated."
A third alternative that is not for Israel to consider, an alternative that I have been talking about for decades now, an alternative that I believe without a doubt is the only practical, feasible and with real potential, is a United States alternative. Thomas Friedman wrote about it in the New York Times on Feb. 1. "Today, I believe President Obama should put his own peace plan on the table, bridging the Israeli and Palestinian positions, and demand that the two sides negotiate on it without any preconditions. It is vital for Israel’s future — at a time when there is already a global campaign to delegitimize the Jewish state — that it disentangle itself from the Arabs’ story as much as possible. There is a huge storm coming, Israel. Get out of the way." As hard as it is to believe, but I am indeed unable to find the right word to express my agreement with Thomas Friedman.
Let us all see what happens in the near future, we may already be witnessing an amazing chapter in human history.
Now, please read and reflect on below editorial by MJ Rosenberg.
Hussein
|
